Kukla's Korner Hockey

Rule 83.4 of the AHL rule book, “If the puck is shot on goal during a delayed off-side, the play shall be allowed to continue under the normal clearing-the-zone rules. Should the puck, as a result of this shot, enter the defending team’s goal during a delayed off-side, either directly or off the goalkeeper, a player or an official on the ice, the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side. The fact that the attacking team may have cleared the zone prior to the puck entering the goal has no bearing on this ruling.”

added 10:38am, The AHL released a statement regarding the goal which you can read below…

TORONTO ... American Hockey League President and CEO David Andrews has issued the following statement:

“We have spoken with Toronto Marlies management and confirmed that a rules interpretation error by the on-ice officials occurred on the Norfolk Admirals’ overtime goal during Game 3 of the Calder Cup Finals.

“On the play, a dump-in from center ice by a Norfolk player caromed off a stanchion and into the Toronto net. The correct application of AHL Rule 83.4 would have negated the Norfolk goal due to a delayed offside call.

“As AHL By-Laws do not allow for any change to the final result of a game based on an incorrect rule interpretation, the result of the game stands.”

Comments

There’s been a lot of gnashing of teeth over it (whether it was offsides or not, whether the goal even counts as a SOG because of the weird bounces, etc) , but the simple fact remains had Scrivens stayed in his net there would be no story here at all.

Goalies got it into their heads at some point that they could wander around without consequences, and that’s not actually the truth. It’s Scrivens’ fault: he left the net open for it to happen. Don’t wander around in OT.

But because it’s a Toronto team that fell victim to it, conspiracy will be claimed I’m sure.

Now we know why the referees are horrible in the NHL, they’re horrible in the AHL. There were 2 players offsides on that, one in the center and one on the left-wing. What I can’t see on this is whether that linesman raised his hand or not for offsides.

There’s been a lot of gnashing of teeth over it (whether it was offsides or not, whether the goal even counts as a SOG because of the weird bounces, etc) , but the simple fact remains had Scrivens stayed in his net there would be no story here at all.

That’s great except none of it matters because according to the rules it’s not a goal. If Scivens had stayed in his net and allowed the puck to go in between his legs, it still shouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what Scrivens did because the rules state that it should not be a goal.

Come on. It’s at least a little Scrivens fault. His job is to keep the puck out of the net and had he done his job the referee would not have been in a position to blow a call with an egregious misinterpreting of the rule. The refs screwed up… But Scrivens made a mistake first.

This is an officiating problem and possibly a league problem. Officiating, for obvious reasons. A league problem because I’m not sure if there was even recourse for the officials to review the goal to check the delayed offside.

If he had tried to clear it but missed it and it went in, it’s not a goal.

That’s like saying that when Zach Parise swept the puck into the net in Game 1 or 2, it was Jonathan Quick’s fault for not stopping it. It was an illegal goal, it doesn’t matter what Scrivens did, it shouldn’t have counted.

If the Norfolk player launched the puck into the crowd and someone in attendance threw it back onto the ice and into the net, is that also Scrivens’s fault?

But Scrivens made a mistake first.

He absolutely didn’t.

Even if one were to concede that Scrivens made a mistake (which I categorically do not), the second the puck left the Norfolk player’s stick the refs should’ve noted that it was a delayed offside and that a goal wouldn’t count, before Scrivens even left the net.

I’m a huge fan of Dallas Eakins and felt he should have been given the Leafs job instead of Carlyle, but this is the fault of the Marlies’ coaching staff. It’s so obviously an offside situation and yet they just walk off the bench and accept it. How are they not throwing a fit? The game can’t be overturned after the fact, but raising enough of a stink that the goal gets some kind of review while the game is still going was totally within their reach IMO. Then the correct call gets made for the refs who can’t do their job and the game continues. Scrivens deserved so much better.

I’m a little confused here. According to the rule above, “Should the puck, as a result of this shot, enter the defending team’s goal during a delayed off-side, either directly or off the goalkeeper, a player or an official on the ice, the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side”. It doesn’t say anything about going in off of another part of the rink, just if it goes in off of another person on the rink. There’s no wording in this rule that I can see that would negate the goal upon the basis that the puck hit a stanchion. I could use some further clarification on this because by the exact wording of the rule, I don’t see the controversy.

Posted by
Chris in Hockey Hell
from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 06/08/12 at 05:31 PM ET

There’s no wording in this rule that I can see that would negate the goal upon the basis that the puck hit a stanchion. I could use some further clarification on this because by the exact wording of the rule, I don’t see the controversy.

That’s probably because the rink isn’t a player in the game.

If the puck goes off the boards on an offsides dump-in it doesn’t negate the offsides.